Thanks for the comment, Jay. In an effort to review both sides of this issue, we've got opinions from both state legislators and the man above is a protestor who took the opposing side of this issue. I'm adding additional quotes and information to this story shortly.

I see but one Latino.

I would love to see this!

I wholeheartedly agree - Alberta Darling and SanFelippo should be the ones taking a pay cut. This is just another move on their part to gain power over the entire State - Next thing you know they will be appointing business managers or administrators like Michigan did. Milwaukee does NOT need interference from Alberta Darling or SanFelippo - they are puppets who should work for their own constituents in their own areaand stay out of the County's business . Cut their pay and next time around dump them by NOT voting for them!!

"should work for their own constituents in their own areaand stay out of the County's business"

HUH? What county do the constituents in there own area live in?

zzz

Excellent! Time to kick the foxes out of the chicken house. Who do these self indulgent trough feeders think they are? State and fed electorate should not receive one stitch of taxpayer money or benefits for holding office. Elected office is a privilege, not some self serving opportunity. We all have the responsibility to throw these elected POS’s out of office. Do it!

Well we've had the pension scandal under Ament, all the stuff you didn't like under Walker, Abele's been pretty much following in Walker's footsteps and they haven't been able to do much about any of that. If that's the best they can do, losing a few of them or making them part time like everywhere else doesn't seem like a very big gamble. If it doesn't work out, change it again. The county is sucking wind and can't afford to maintain the luxury of a marginally effective counterbalance to CE abuses, whether they be actual or embellished. Lets give it a shot. It's not like we're going to be losing some irreplaceable public servants.

How many hours does the typical county supervisor currently work per week?

How is making it possible for the citizens of Milwaukee County to vote on a binding referendum on makeup of the Milwaukee County Board attacking the county? What could be more pro-Milwaukee County than giving its residents a voice in the matter?

Last I heard there is not going to be a referendum put to the voters on this matter. That being the case, it is an overreach of the state and should be a matter of local control. If you took an average of what other supervisory boards make for number of residents they represent, milwaukee should be getting about $30,000, so they are getting more at the moment, but a cut to $15,000 is too much. Government shouldn't be a job, it should be a duty and we have lost some of that at certain levels.
The final point I will make is, why didn't Sanfileppo propose this while he was on the county board and put it up to referendum then. Seems he was more than happy to take the money while he was there.

@ Robert Hansen... Can you provide a link for your information on the number of constituents/per supervisor,pay scale, and the total board size for each of Wisconsin's 72 Counties?

While you're at it, see if you can find something that states there's no referendum included in the bill. That directly contradicts everything I've heard about it and also the content of the article we're commenting on here.

Waukesha has 25 county board members for 390,730 residents. They get $9,121 and the board chairperson gets $52,821. So you have 9121x24+52821 to get $271,725. Divide 271,725 by 390,730 and they get paid 70 cents per citizen. Milwaukee has 18 board members earning about $50,000 according to any article I have seen. Milwaukee county has a population of 952,532. So each Waukesha supervisor represents 15,629 residents vs. Milwaukee county at 52,918 per supervisor. If Waukesha board members are being paid $0.70 per resident they represent, and Milwaukee was based on the same scale, Milwaukee supervisors would be paid $37,042. So there is one example from what is arguably one of the most conservative counties in the state.

Here you go Bob, http://m.jsonline.com/more/news/milwaukee/gmc-pledges-to-actively-campaign-for-the-push-to-cut-supervisors-pay-bj8bl5o-186481371.html

Robert it looks like there are two issues there. The change in board structure and the budget cut. Based on the link, the board structure would go to a binding referendum vote in April. The budget cut would not.

Bob, your right, I miss read it the first time through.

Yes, there are three Fitzgeralds in state government. Papa Fitzgerald, now head of the state troopers, will have a triple-dip pension when he retires.

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em! Apparently they know something we don't. Cream rises to the top and $h!t floats. I like to think of the Fitzgeralds as the latter.

SIRI has a more life-like personality than Alberta.

No, you love the idea of less democracy and more Koch Brothers control.

Keith Jackass, Explain the Koch/Milwaukee County connection.

If you are unaware of how the Koch brothers work, check out Robert Greenwald's Koch Brothers Exposed on Netflix.

@AWD...One more conspiracy theory. Let's keep it real.

Are you for real? Or a left over from the 1950's.

State government interferes with Milwaukee business, as you call it, all the time. It kicks taxes back to Milwaukee for MPS, for instance. I suppose they could stop doing that if you don't like them interfering with Milwaukee business.

Both legislators are from Milwaukee County. Republicans are also against bloated government. The County Board is bloated government. You'll get your chance to vote in support of bloated government should this bill pass.

Sorry, Greg in OC. Should have read your comment before I posted mine below.

Right on Anne!

You really believe that. Sounds more like "his" sour grapes to me. Of course he now has the grand dame puppeteer Alberta following him. We rank almost at the bottom of the pile in job creation,and here we are hoping to put some more people on the unemployment roles. That is why Madison should stay in Madison.

Garrence I have to respectfully disagree with your theory that being a successful business man will lead him to make correct decisions for us. We just had a long running milk plant in a volatile industry with razor this margins shut down by some young, punky, hotshot shark out of California. He could not live his lifestyle on single digit profit margins. Now look what happened, 100 more families affected with the loss of a wage earner.

Even the State of Alabama has created more jobs than Scott Walker......... pathetic!!
Walker gets paid about $147,000 per year to run around and get paid for out-of-state speaking engagements, all the while only touching down in Wisconsin every now and then only working a few hours her and there - strictly for the sake of making an appearance.

Alabama's a "Right-to-Work" state. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they'd be doing better than Wisconsin in job creation. Most "Right-to-Work" states are.

Hey Bob McBride did you really mean Alberta's right to work state? The Darling of the GOP.

Lee - no.

So we went from let's say without doing research 0 right to work states to say 1/2 the country as right to work states. Possibly some day we may have 50 right to work states. With 50 right to work states the playing field will arguably be level. Now what? What will be the next step to attracting business to WI?

As far a the State of WI goes, I don't see that much mattering because we're not going to be a "Right to Work" state.

I think Scott Walker's biggest mistake, beyond, suggesting we'd see 250K jobs, was suggesting the state was "Open for Business". This state has never been open for business. 100M people made very clear in the early part of 2011 that WI is not open for business. Another million or so made it very clear that even suggesting that WI is open for business will get you recalled. Wisconsin is open for union action, public employment, expanding and enhancing the public education and university systems, any government funded foray in to infrastructure improvement, mass transit, technologies with little or no real current demand, etc.

Bob, that's not what fueled the recall and you know it. Asking public employees to take another financial hit right after Doyle did the same was harsh but it was a recession. Asking for and implementing ALEC union stripping legislation and hiding it in a "budget repair" bill stoked the flame. Comparing Doyle to Walker, both cut pay of state workers and restructured debt because of the recession. Doyle added new debt, Walker added new interest charges/same difference. The biggest difference, based on my observation, between the two is Walker's arrogance, embrace of a special interest group (he joined ALEC in the early '90s as a state representative), and desire for the spotlight. I had a number of issues with Doyle but of the two he was the competent governor.

Bren,

The message sent by both the demonstrations and recall was that Wisconsin puts preserving it's public employee unions ahead of any desire there might be for attracting new business to the state. Your personal reasons for signing the recall and supporting the protests are immaterial.

I agree. I work for a publicly traded company that does a lot of subcontracting. One of the reasons, beside getting work completed, is kickbacks to supervisors and managers.

Some of that outsourcing led to damage of the marble floors in the State Capitol recently; how much that will cost to repair is not yet known. The state employees who used to do the cleaning knew how to take care of the floors.

This is simply Scott Walker in action at the state level, without a board of supervisors to play "dad" and fix the worst budget mistakes. This comes as no surprise to me, that's why I didn't vote for him.

Hear, hear!

What, what?
Would you apply the same standards to Obama? If Obama got $1 for every $1 he cut the deficit, he would owe just $600,000,000,000 and change. He could not afford to fly coach, much less AF1.

Here, here!!!

Perhaps someone needs to read article 1 section 8 of the constitution again.

Hear, hear!

By the above criteria, The President would be making three million dollars.

And Greg, your comment was pure nuts and the usual diversionary BS, but what else is new?

New? It's past 11:00am and you're not face down on the bar. That's new.

You don't get why they promote things they like and stop things they don't?

@GD You are not saying that Scott, Alberta et al are hypocrites --- are you ?

Yea Tosa, profound rhetoric like that is what makes businesses want to start or relocate business here.

What good is a Right-to-work State when the pay is less than a fair living wage that anyone can actually live off of. In Right-to-work States, far too many people who have to work for those low wages need supplemental help to survive - like food stamps, medicaid, etc. If the US is going to continue with a consumer based economic system, the consumers have to earn enough to buy consumer goods and services. The lower the wages, the more assistance is needed for survival....
The Right-to-work States have lowered the bar, and corporations looking for nothing but the lowest employee costs will not come. These governors and legislators do not realize they have started something equivalent to a gas war.... or a coupon war. If the workers wise up in those states, they will organize and get rid of this oppressive bill in their respective states.

@T A-A Intellectually I agree with you -- but it has not come close to working well with Shorewood's Village Board --- a prime example of Ellen Eckman who is finally leaving, after years of undistinguished service, showing often a lack of understanding of the issues.

"My personal opinion is that it is better to have a citizen-board. Despite a few disadvantages, the closer the power is to the people, the better."

Yes, Anti, that is where it should go in my opinion. There should be no such thing as payroll career politicians from mayors right up to fed senators, other than per diem and some reasonable compensation. Elected office should be a privilege and as such the office should be respected with true represented service and not money.